A charity that I’m involved with is the frequent beneficiary of clothing donations from a local apparel maker that specializes in athletic-related gear. The clothing that’s donated – all brand new – is very high quality. Most of it goes to the children and families we support, but the company often earmarks something or other for our donors and volunteers: hoodies, zip-fronts, vests bearing our logo.
A couple of years, the donor-volunteer donation was a very nice quarter-zip runner’s windbreaker. Unisex sizing.
One of our regular volunteers had recently moved, but continues to work for us remotely. I wanted to make sure she got one of these windbreakers. When I emailed her to get her size, I warned her “whatever size you think you wear in unisex, if you have breasts and hips, order at least a size up.” I based this on the fact that I had taken a Large for myself, and, while it fit fine, that fine fit was a little snug.
As a 5’7” size 12, I will admit that plenty of times, I wear a women’s L. But not always: as often as not, I’m an M.
When an item is unisex, which in reality means that it’s sized for men, I’m mostly a Medium, but if I want things a bit looser, I wear a Large.
But there’s no way I would consider myself the equivalent of a men’s Large. Other than if we’re talking about clothing is designed for runners or rowers, who don’t tend to have much by way of breasts or hips.
Anyway, after I warned A, we both had an email chuckle, as she has two kids and is the proud possessor of both breasts and hips.
The bottom line is that there’s a reason why the size and fit of clothing designed for men differs from clothing designed for women.
We’re not talking ‘why can’t men wear skirts’ here. We’re talking physicality.
Yes, there’s a wide range of body types, but in general the standard woman’s body isn’t the same as the standard man’s.
Which isn’t stopping soccer star Meghan Klingenberg, who was a member of the US team that won the Women’s World Cup:
… she and three other star players are launching a business that will play off the success and popularity of that 2015 team, creating an edgy lifestyle brand that will start with gender-neutral streetwear and clothing but could eventually branch into products like wearable technology or wellness items such as sunscreen. (Source: Washington Post)
The new brand, Re-Inc, was founded to see if these athletes could capitalize on their win so that some of the economic value derived from it would accrue to them – rather, than, say to Nike - and to “highlight issues like equality and inclusivity.”
There will be only one size chart — ranging from extra extra small to extra extra large, rather than separate sizing for men and women — and the first products will be beige T-shirts that are either cropped or oversized and read “liberté, égalité, defendez,” a play on the French motto. More clothing items are expected over the summer.
Well, I’m a big yawn on products that come in beige-only, a color that doesn’t look all that good on an awful lot of people. Not that we need clothing to be pink-and-unicorn for girls, or khaki-and-dump-truck for boys. But beige?
And sizing just ain’t gender-neutral. Something that fits someone without breasts and hips is not going to hang right on someone who’s with them.
If it makes people off the binary feel better to not have clothing sorted as Male or Female, then maybe Re-Inc. can come up with a new way of categorizing it. Some women’s clothing already lets you pick a swim suit or pair of pants based on whether you’re straight (build, not orientation) or curvy.
Klingenberg says that her company is taking this into consideration. Sort of:
Streetwear, said Klingenberg…“is a category where men design the clothes for men with men’s sizing in mind. That works, but we feel like it could be better. We think we could do it different, and think we could do it in a way that’s more inclusive.” On the website, they intend to show male and female models in crop tops, say, or both genders in oversized tees, as well as presenting other clothing options in non-binary ways.
I’m guessing that those crop-top and oversized tee models, whether male or female, will have fairly androgynous builds.
The concept is being launched at a time when young consumers are more likely than ever to be aware of gender fluidity and less likely to categorize products as just for men or just for women.
Dolls for boys, trucks for girls, removing pink bicycles entirely from the realm of consideration. I’m all for it.
But when it comes to what fits and what doesn’t, there’s still the issue of breasts and hips. However one identifies, you either got ‘em or you don’t.
Beyond the question of sizing, the Re-Inc. founders want to go about things differently:
…seeking out female and minority vendors and business partners, hiring for diversity, and possibly giving future employees an ownership stake….The four women share decision-making responsibilities, with each specializing in her area of strength — a different approach than many businesses’ hierarchies.
No plans to have just one CEO in place, either. The model is called “circular leadership”, and why not give it a whirl? It’s not like the man-at-the-top model has proven to be so all-fired perfect.
And the fit on those crop tops isn’t going to be that all-fired perfect, either.
Designing clothing for those with a more-or-less gender-neutral body type is fine. Just don’t pretend that there’s no difference between the average woman’s body and that of the average man.
No comments:
Post a Comment